FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux General Discussion

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-06-2010, 11:46 AM
jesse jaara
 
Default Multi architecture binary pkgs

Currently, if one wants to make a pkg, lets
say, for an app that only has binaries available
and only for 32bit archs, then one usually
makes a bin32-appname pkg for it. I don't
like this and would like to have the bin32
and the non-bin32 pkgs to be just one
pkg with the name of the app. But if one
makes this kind of a pkg, one must use
ugly if [[ "$CARCH" = .... statements are in
the PKGBUILD, so I was thinking that
could it be possible to implement some
new variables in PKGBUILDS
like depends32 and optdepends32
and then build32() {} and
package32() {}? I dont know how makepkg
is written, so I dont know how hard it is
to implement these, but in the best case it shouldn't
be more than just one or two if-statements
in the code, so if arch is x86_64 use
the 32 variables if they are present.

--
(\_ /) copy the bunny to your profile
(0.o ) to help him achieve world domination.
(> <) come join the dark side.
/_|_ (we have cookies.)
 
Old 12-06-2010, 01:42 PM
Rémy Oudompheng
 
Default Multi architecture binary pkgs

On 2010/12/6 jesse jaara <jesse.jaara@gmail.com> wrote:
> Currently, if one wants to make a pkg, lets
> say, for an app that only has binaries available
> and only for 32bit archs, then one usually
> makes a bin32-appname pkg for it. I don't
> like this and would like to have the bin32
> and the non-bin32 pkgs to be just one
> pkg with the name of the app. But if one
> makes this kind of a pkg, one must use
> ugly if [[ "$CARCH" = .... statements are in
> the PKGBUILD, so I was thinking that
> could it be possible to implement some
> new variables in PKGBUILDS
> like depends32 and optdepends32
> and then build32() {} and
> package32() {}? I dont know how makepkg
> is written, so I dont know how hard it is
> to implement these, but in the best case it shouldn't
> be more than just one or two if-statements
> in the code, so if arch is x86_64 use
> the 32 variables if they are present.

Hello,

This seems to assume that pacman and makepkg run on systems that are
either 32-bit or 64-bit. IMO, your proposal looks very "ad hoc", and
would add unnecessary complications to makepkg, with no benefit when
dealing with PowerPC, ARM, and other architectures.

--
Rémy.
 
Old 12-06-2010, 01:48 PM
Rémy Oudompheng
 
Default Multi architecture binary pkgs

On 2010/12/6 Rémy Oudompheng <remyoudompheng@gmail.com> wrote:
> This seems to assume that pacman and makepkg run on systems that are
> either 32-bit or 64-bit. IMO, your proposal looks very "ad hoc", and
> would add unnecessary complications to makepkg, with no benefit when
> dealing with PowerPC, ARM, and other architectures.

However, maybe a sensible way to do that would be to allow build()
function to be replaced by "build_$arch" functions in the same fashion
as with split packages.

--
Rémy.
 
Old 12-06-2010, 02:17 PM
C Anthony Risinger
 
Default Multi architecture binary pkgs

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Rémy Oudompheng
<remyoudompheng@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2010/12/6 Rémy Oudompheng <remyoudompheng@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This seems to assume that pacman and makepkg run on systems that are
>> either 32-bit or 64-bit. IMO, your proposal looks very "ad hoc", and
>> would add unnecessary complications to makepkg, with no benefit when
>> dealing with PowerPC, ARM, and other architectures.
>
> However, maybe a sensible way to do that would be to allow build()
> function to be replaced by "build_$arch" functions in the same fashion
> as with split packages.

i like that idea, though i wonder if that would also entail allowing
for all split functions (possibly) needing an $arch.

perhaps `_$arch` could be appended to ANY function in PKGBUILD, and
makepkg would use where appropriate; perhaps even build them all using
chroots/etc.

C Anthony
 
Old 12-07-2010, 09:22 AM
Dan Vrátil
 
Default Multi architecture binary pkgs

On Mon, 6 Dec 2010 15:48:52 +0100, Rémy Oudompheng
<remyoudompheng@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2010/12/6 Rémy Oudompheng <remyoudompheng@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This seems to assume that pacman and makepkg run on systems that are
>> either 32-bit or 64-bit. IMO, your proposal looks very "ad hoc", and
>> would add unnecessary complications to makepkg, with no benefit when
>> dealing with PowerPC, ARM, and other architectures.
>
> However, maybe a sensible way to do that would be to allow build()
> function to be replaced by "build_$arch" functions in the same fashion
> as with split packages.

In most cases, the build() function is same on every architecture, just
configure,make,make install so I don't see no advantage in having
build_$arch() and package_$arch() and
package_$arch_splitpkgname()...this would just make the PKGBUILD huge
and full of duplicate code.

On the other hand, the original idea seems good to me, I'd just
implement it similar way you suggested, i.e. depends_$arch=(),
optdepends_$arch=() etc. You also still need to have a fallback array,
like depends=() for all architectures and depends_x86_64=() specially
when there will be some difference in dependencies on i686 and x86_64
etc.

Dan

--
--
Dan Vrátil
vratil@progdansoft.com
Tel: +4202 732 326 870
Jabber: progdan@jabber.cz

Tento email neobsahuje žádné viry, protože odesÃ*latel nepoužÃ*vá
Windows. /
This email does not contain any viruses because the sender does not use
Windows.
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:18 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org